Learning punches and kicks and then going to a competition that has specific rules about how punches and kicks are applied is very different than learning groundfighting and then learning firearm safety on the side.
Yes.
Those wouldn't normally be part of "firearm safety". That topic is usually about how to not accidentally hurt yourself or others with it, and related topics.
No. Basic gun safety boils down to a few very simple rules.
I also like the theory of reversing #1 when you actually need it. Assume it isn't loaded until you verify that it is.
That is the opposite of a safety rule and invites disaster.
What I mean is, in the event that you need to use your firearm to protect yourself, make sure it's in the condition that it is ready to be used.
I think he was talking about making sure it's loaded when you mean for it to be (before holstering at the start of the day, etc.), which is loosely the reverse of the safety rule.
100% agree. Students are paying you as an instructor for you to share what you know with them not for you to tell them to go pay another person to learn another skill they can't provide.
It's too late, at that point. Checking it should have been done WAY before you need it. And confirming it's loaded and ready to fire is not a safety rule.
Checking to make sure the gun is operational is important. But it's absolutely not a safety rule.
I think it also matters what the students are there to learn. If they are there to learn Art A, then I question weather they should be required to learn things that are clearly not a part of Art A.
It's like to talk about whether takedown (how to shoot) or anti-takedown (firearm safety) is more important. Should we address both?
On the one hand, who said it was? On the other, I consider being able to protect myself a part of safety.
You did. By replying to a comment about basic safety rules to add this nonsense.
Kind of missed the point, didn't you? Shocking.
You're admitting that I didn't actually say it, but that you inferred it from my post.
Oh, so now we're resorting to insults and condescension instead of actual arguments. You use this tactic a lot. This is another one of those times I would put you on my ignore list if you weren't a moderator. It's a shame that I can't, because I'd probably enjoy this forum a lot more if I didn't have to put up with your (to use your word) nonsense.
Context is sort of how these things work. If people are talking about safety rules and you chime in, it's reasonable to think you're talking about, you know... safety rules.
Other folks understood exactly what I meant. You're purposefully misunderstanding me so you can argue with me and point out how little I "get it". It's something you do quite often, and its really unbecoming from someone who is supposedly a high-ranking traditional martial artist and moderator on a martial arts forum. I cannot put you on ignore.
I don't put people on ignore for reports, but I've found it very easy to ignore someone's posts. Most of the time if I see a name I'll scroll right past what they write unless I have a specific reason to read it-that gets rid of any temptation to respond since I've nothing to respond to.
Sure you can. Is someone putting a gun to your head and forcing you to read my posts and respond to them? No? Then it sounds like a self-discipline problem to me.
